Case law

BECKFORD

22 I. & N. Dec. 1216 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2000

The respondent’s motion to reopen is clearly untimely. … The respondent has established aspects of his case that clearly compromised its fairness and resulted in his having to resort to this untimely motion.

Mariner v. United States

1 Cl. Ct. 430 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 28, 1983

The burden of establishing these elements is on the proponent (here the defendant) of the doctrine. Adkins v. United States, Ct.Cl. No. 420-80 (order entered September 29,1981). … Despite the clear showing by defendant of an inexcusable delay on plaintiff’s part, it is well settled that the defendant must also establish that it has been prejudiced thereby.

PharmaCann LLC

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Jun 16, 2017

Midland Fumigant, Inc., 205 F.3d 1219, 53 USPQ2d 1929, 1932 (10th Cir. 2000) (lawful use in commerce is required to establish trademark rights); CreAgri, Inc. v. … To be clear, § 542 does not provide immunity from prosecution for federal marijuana offenses.

Davis v. United States

35 C.C.P.A. 79 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 2, 1947

Clearly it appears that, prior to and at the time of the passage of the Revenue Act of 1938, there was a commodity in commerce known as “Western white spruce.” … It will be observed that these witnesses, qualified to testify in that regard, agree that white spruce from Ontario had not been sold as “Western white spruce” prior to 1938.

Bluebonnet Sayings Bank v. United States

47 Fed. Cl. 156 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 6, 2000

Credible testimony established that Lifeshares did not purchase subordinated debt in 1989 because it no longer qualified as regulatory capital and would not have satisfied the new capital requirement if plaintiffs used subordinated … “In the absence of express congressional consent to the award of interest separate from a general waiver of immunity to suit, the United States is immune from an interest award.” Library of Congress v.

Burwell v. Commissioner

89 T.C. 580 · United States Tax Court · Sep 16, 1987

The Burwells established a separate bank account for their Charter 30470 at Crocker Bank in the name of Universal Life Church, Inc. They alone and not ULC Modesto chose the bank and determined the account signators. … This is evidenced clearly by the checks which they wrote on the accounts. They used these accounts as any individual would use their personal checking accounts.

Van Trinh v. United States Secretary of Agriculture

395 F. Supp. 2d 1259 · United States Court of International Trade · Aug 29, 2005

The question clearly designates that section as being for “County Office Use Only,” and shows the “yes” box checked with a date of December 11, 2003, indicating that someone in the Matagorda County FSA Office looked over … Additionally, § 1580.303 of Agriculture’s regulations specify that “[a]pplicants shall satisfy by September 30 all certifications of § 1580.301(e) to qualify for adjustment assistance payments.” 7 C.F.R. § 1580.303(a).

R. C. A. Victor Div. Radio Corp. of America v. United States

26 Cust. Ct. 154 · United States Customs Court · Apr 5, 1951

When asked whether collective illustrative exhibit 1 was an envelope, the witness stated: *157 I hardly feel qualified to answer that to give you the proper definition. … That Congress intended such articles only as could be defined by the narrower meaning of the word “envelope” seems clearly indicated by the decision in the case of United States v. Graser-Rothe Co. et al., 11 Ct. Cust.

S. P. Skinner & Co. v. United States

24 Cust. Ct. 636 · United States Customs Court · May 25, 1950

In the case before me, I have the sworn testimony of a well-qualified witness who was subjected to cross-examination and whose testimony is not refuted or shown to be in real conflict with any proof, oral or documentary, … I am satisfied that the weight of evidence clearly establishes a foreign market value for the merchandise in controversy, as that value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, supra.

Moss v. United States

101 Fed. Cl. 611 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 8, 2011

The Tucker Act concurrently “waives the Government’s sovereign immunity for those actions.” Fisher, 402 F.3d at 1172 . … If the provision relied upon is found to be money-mandating, the plaintiff need not rely upon a waiver of sovereign immunity beyond the Tucker Act. Huston v.

Barbados 6, Ltd. v. Commissioner

85 T.C. 900 · United States Tax Court · Dec 10, 1985

The notice clearly states at the top, "Date fpaa Mailed to Tax Matters Partner: June 18, 1984.” … Pursuant to our Rules, a partner may participate in the action by filing with the Court a notice of election to participate setting forth facts establishing that such partner satisfies the requirements of section 6226(d).

Slovacek v. United States

40 Fed. Cl. 828 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 6, 1998

As defendant correctly contends, this clearly constitutes a rational basis for disparate treatment. The federal district courts in Texas are bound by the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Alexander v. … Federal Claims is an Article I court of limited jurisdiction created by Congress as a forum where private parties could sue the government for non-tort money claims, where the claims would otherwise be barred by sovereign immunity

Markle v. Commissioner

28 B.T.A. 201 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 31, 1933

Petitioners are the duly qualified executors of the estate of Mary R. … Much of the stipulation refers to extrinsic facts and testimony intended to establish them.

Groff v. United States

72 Fed. Cl. 68 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 27, 2006

The BJA found that SJH had “a clearly superior right of control as his employer, ie., the company could remove Mr. … Contractor’s original rates were established under the 1995 bid.

Ellis First National Bank of Bradenton v. United States

550 F.2d 9 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 23, 1977

This objective is clearly set forth in H. Rep. … The House version of the Act did not contain any exception for personal residences or farms; this proviso was added by the Senate, for reasons clearly expressed in its report, S. Rep.

Singer Manufacturing Co. v. United States

33 Cust. Ct. 60 · United States Customs Court · Jul 22, 1954

All of the witnesses were men of ability, intelligence, and experience, and well qualified to testify upon the particular subject matter, and, since their testimony is unchallenged and unrefuted, we deem it sufficient to … We are clearly of the opinion, for the reasons set forth in the authorities above quoted, that the subject machines are sewing machines within the intent, scope, and meaning of that term, as it appears in said paragraph 372

TRW Environmental Safety Systems, Inc. v. United States

35 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,712 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 24, 1989

Clearly then, these indisputable facts conclusively establish Mr. Rousso as a supervisory employee under § 7211(a)(1) and (3). The court finds, therefore, that Mr. … Collectively, the foregoing clearly establishes that SAIC’s interests in its existing contracts were jeopardized by the scope of the SEDM contract.

Egan v. United States

158 F. Supp. 377 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 15, 1958

It was later fully established that these witnesses lied. … If found physically qualified and if in opinion commanding officer appointee is mentally, morally, and professionally qualified and not involved disciplinary action, appointee will be informed of his appointment.

Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. v. Commissioner

76 T.C. 325 · United States Tax Court · Feb 18, 1981

Thus, if the property transferred had clearly been inventory, for example, the transaction would have come within section .02(l)(a)(i) of the guidelines, and thus it would “fit the mold” of one type of property described … declined to deal with terms and conditions, and simply used his supplemental brief to reargue his legal theories. 21 Respondent’s position may well have merit under broader facts squarely presenting the issue, but those are clearly

Williams v. Commissioner

1 B.T.A. 1101 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 5, 1925

Williams, of Baltimore, Maryland, was duly appointed and qualified as executor of her estate. The Commissioner, in auditing the income-tax return of Ellen C. … The record of this appeal establishes the fact that Ellen C.